Helen remarked on the Radio 2 messageboard the other day (and I hope she doesn't mind me quoting her)

"I do feel a bit put out that we are paying for the BBC's presence on Facebook as it will no doubt have to be policed in a similar way to the message boards"

To which Peta answered ...

I post content onto our Facebook group a few times a week, but it isn't moderated by us, if you don't like content on Facebook you alert it, and Facebook will remove it if they think it breaks *their* rules.
But on the 6 Music messageboard she (Peta)wrote this

As admins of our own group we have the right - and the buttons provided by Facebook for admin use - to exclude and remove people, content and/or links from our own pages.

If you know of someone would like to appeal against a Facebook ban, or about the way that we manage our Facebook pages, please go via the complaints site. It's worth noting that anyone who has been seen to contribute harassing, abusive or offensive content about BBC staff members or other listeners won't be reinstated, for obvious reasons.

If you'd like more information about why Facebook have set it up their site so that admins can manage the content posted to their own pages, or info about their rules and their application by page owners, why not contact Facebook? I believe they have a help centre on their site.

Facebook and twitter are just transitory fads. They’ll be replaced by something else soon enough. They're both too mainstream now to be cool. Once your mum-in-law is on twitter, it's like taking her with you when you shop for shoes:get some nice flat ones dear- those will ruin your feet.

You are right that there are no comments for anything to do with Chris Evans (or Simon Mayo), except for his appearance on Blue Peter, and then they are only about BP - but there certainly are for Chris Tarrant and Vanessa Feltz, and of the 43 for her not one is complimentary._________________Ron

If you click the 'Everyone' tab at the top of the page (below the line of photos going along the top), you'll be able to see what other people have written on BBC Radio 2's "wall"; it certainly does allow writing on their page, as well as commenting on their updates._________________Fred Hart
Student & Broadcaster
Website: http://www.fred-hart.co.uk

I went onto the Radio 2 page and clicked on “Discussions”. Where are all the topics that used to attract so much traffic on the R2 MB? It seems that the latest comment about anything was at the end of January i.e. about 4 weeks ago.

I went onto the Radio 2 page and clicked on “Discussions”. Where are all the topics that used to attract so much traffic on the R2 MB? It seems that the latest comment about anything was at the end of January i.e. about 4 weeks ago.

Is the Radio 2 presence on Facebook justified?

Its on the main "Wall"; the "Discussions" bit is rarely used on the majority of Facebook pages._________________Fred Hart
Student & Broadcaster
Website: http://www.fred-hart.co.uk

I can't see how you can get anything out of it by being a mere observer since the content is the product of the connections you make - the better your connections the more engaging content you get. The trouble is that many people's "friends" on FB are obsessed with sharing utter trivia (what they had for breakfast, etc) which gives a completely unfair impression of what it has to offer.

I occasionally have a cull of those people I "friend" (peculiar use of the word as a verb, by the way!) because I tire of their wall posts, but I value greatly the interchanges I have with lots of people. I've also re-established contact all seven people who were in my student tutorial group over 30 years ago and who are scattered around the globe.

I guess all forms of "social media" are capable of delivering whatever the user wants to gain from it, to be.

Then again, I think the Radio 2 group section on FB is a complete waste of space and I just don't bother with it.

H...
Underneath the last comment, or at the bottom of every thread, there's a thin, rectangular box with "Write a comment". Click on that, it will get a little larger, and a blue Comment button will appear - you can now write a comment and press the button to publish it. If you think better of it just click anywhere outside the box and it will vanish.

I have not been moved to make any comment on any BBC FB page._________________Ron

The "like" button is mis-named; what it actually relates to is the fact that a user has created a link between their own bit of Facebook and a third-party's and - in doing so - you have provided Facebook with an essential piece of metadata that they can exploit. It also means that the 3rd party has a measure of who's watching their feed and provides you with access to it in order to contribute to it.

Ah well I haven't 'liked' R2 so don't get any feeds. Think I prefer it that way!

The way I see it is that take this board, well we've sort it out to read and post on but what we post doesn't automatically go to everyone that we have the tiniest miniscule of a link to. I know we have no idea who is reading the board but it's going to be far less than the numbers who are on Facebook.

Yes it is, because when you click "like" you're adding to the metadata that FB's servers hold about your account and then connecting it with the third party's (eg: Radio 2's FB account metadata). The two sets of data are then linked which gives FB - and those 3rd parties with whom it shares its data - a peek at your preferences and FB activity. The fact that FB is bringing together the "Like" and "Share" functionality isn't something they've decided to do on a corporate whim.

That's very interesting Colin. I wonder if I really need my Facebook page?

That's something you have to weigh up yourself, Helen. Whilst I'm extremely carefully about how I use my FB account I also find it very, very useful in establishing contact with old friends and also keeping in touch with family members around the globe (as well as in the UK).

That's one of the reasons I keep it, even though I de-activate it from time to time. You never know when you may just want to use it.

I'm glad you gave that link as I had thought of maybe leaving a comment (a not very complimentary one I'd add) about Vanessa Feltz as I get the impression that more notice is taken of that page than was of the R2 message boards. I could be mistaken though!

Yes it is, because when you click "like" you're adding to the metadata that FB's servers hold about your account and then connecting it with the third party's (eg: Radio 2's FB account metadata). The two sets of data are then linked which gives FB - and those 3rd parties with whom it shares its data - a peek at your preferences and FB activity. The fact that FB is bringing together the "Like" and "Share" functionality isn't something they've decided to do on a corporate whim.

That page is talking about "Liking" content hosted off the Facebook servers - and therefore content that isn't controlled by Facebook. Its more like a "Share" button really - same functionality.

Liking a page hosted on Facebook (ie http://www.facebook.com/BBCR2) is a completely different concept which used to be known as "Becoming a Fan" of a page; nothing to do with the old "Share" functionality. This type of "Liking" has been around for years - long before the changes in the article you've linked to is talking about happened.

These pages are more like someone's account, the difference being that while I as a Facebook user can "like" BBC Radio 2's page and see everything on it, BBC Radio 2 can not, as a result, access my profile and find out about me/my preferences & activity on Facebook.

(That's me speaking from experience - I am a page admin for several Facebook pages. As an admin I can see exactly the same as a normal Facebook user can see on the page, but the difference is that when I write on the "Wall" of the page, it appears as a status update from the page rather than a post under my personal account).

Helen May wrote:

I'm glad you gave that link as I had thought of maybe leaving a comment (a not very complimentary one I'd add) about Vanessa Feltz as I get the impression that more notice is taken of that page than was of the R2 message boards. I could be mistaken though!

I'm not sure I'd go that far, but they do seem to respond to complaints more than they did on the old message boards._________________Fred Hart
Student & Broadcaster
Website: http://www.fred-hart.co.uk

That page is talking about "Liking" content hosted off the Facebook servers - and therefore content that isn't controlled by Facebook. Its more like a "Share" button really - same functionality.

Well, not quite. There's more going on, server-side.

Fred wrote:

Liking a page hosted on Facebook (ie http://www.facebook.com/BBCR2) is a completely different concept which used to be known as "Becoming a Fan" of a page; nothing to do with the old "Share" functionality. This type of "Liking" has been around for years - long before the changes in the article you've linked to is talking about happened.

It's what Facebook is now doing with the information regarding the nature of your "like" that's changed - and one which is being discussed at length in techie circles.

Here's what a web-server admin friend of mine wrote to me yesterday:

A friend of mine wrote:

I never use the Like button. A colleague showed me how my browsing was showing up on websites that he was visiting. He visited The Independent website and it told him what articles a colleague had been reading. I don't know about you, but I'm not that keen on all my Facebook "friends" knowing what I am up to on the internet. Are you?

And even more to the point, this means the website I visit doesn't now just have some vague information like my IP address - they now have the names and details of me and all my "friends".

We didn't register or log in to The Independent's website. The only connection was that we were Facebook "friends". Obviously, this information is being picked up via cookies. I've just had another peek at The Independent's website again. It doesn't show what my friends have read - only if they've "liked" something (presumably they have to click a "like" button for that to happen). So how is it that the site has identified me without that? Does that not contravene EU privacy laws?

I'm now told that if you "like" or "share" anything from that site, then, by default, all your Facebook "friends" see it too. You can turn it off, but how many ordinary Facebook users are aware of such issues or know how to do it? Here's what I've learned:

NOTE: If your "friends" don't do this, they will be sharing info about you as well.

What really bothers me - and many others - is that my setting was not set to ENABLE but my information was being freely shared out by The Independent regardless.

From a techie point of view, it looks to me like it basically it allowed for parter sites to join a Facebook API that allowed you to then see what your friends had liked and commented on and such when they had visited yet another partner site signed up to the scheme.

So, I re-iterate. Be VERY CAREFUL when using the "like" function in Facebook - because you never know what's happening to your data. Check your privacy settings now.

But it still hints that all is not what it appears to be with Facebook's "like" functionality. The fact that you "like" it gives Facebook enough information and metadata to share with others and, by all accounts, they do. If you don't give them that information, they can't use it.

I never use the Like button. A colleague showed me how my browsing was showing up on websites that he was visiting. He visited The Independent website and it told him what articles a colleague had been reading. I don't know about you, but I'm not that keen on all my Facebook "friends" knowing what I am up to on the internet. Are you?

And even more to the point, this means the website I visit doesn't now just have some vague information like my IP address - they now have the names and details of me and all my "friends". </quote>

Crikey Colin, I am now even more put off the thought of going anywhere near Facebook. There seem to be so many loopholes to catch out the unwary.